The Delhi High Court, while imposing a fine of Rs. 10,000, has rejected a petition contesting the appointment of the Administrator of the Delhi Waqf Board. Justice Subramonium Prasad remarked that the petition lacked substantial grounds for challenging the appointment, thus deeming it an abuse of the legal process.

“This Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition and is inclined to dismiss the writ petition imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- on the Petitioner to be deposited with the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks from today,” the court said.

The plea filed by Yamin Ali, a resident of Mehrauli, contesting the actions of the Administrator of the Delhi Waqf Board, has been dismissed. Ali's contention was related to the burial site of his mother, situated near the historic Akhoundji Mosque, which he argued falls under the classification of a Waqf Property overseen by the Delhi Waqf Board.

Yamin Ali contended that a section of the mosque was demolished under the authority of the Administrator, who, as the custodian of the Delhi Waqf Board, should have safeguarded it. Ali sought the removal of the Administrator, arguing that he neglected his duty to protect a Waqf Property. However, the court dismissed the plea, observing that Ali had previously filed a similar petition with identical allegations, which was later withdrawn before another bench.

“The Petitioner has once again filed a Writ Petition with the very same averments and has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition,” the court said.

In addition to highlighting the perceived shortcomings of the Administrator's actions, Ali failed to provide any specific reasons to demonstrate how the official was unqualified for the position of Administrator of the Waqf Board. The court remarked that Ali's petition seemed to inject a communal angle into the actions of the Administrator without substantial grounds.

It observed: “This Court does not find any reason to quash the appointment of Respondent No.2. It cannot be said that Respondent No.2 is not qualified to be appointed as an Administrator. This Writ Petition is nothing but an abuse of the process of law and is a publicity-oriented litigation.”

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Shams Khwaja, Advocate

Counsel for Respondents: Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC with Ms. Aditi Kapoor, Advs for R-1 and 2; Mr. Santosh Kumar, S.O (M.A) on behalf of R-2; Ms. Shobhana Takiar, St. Counsel, Mr. Sanjay Katyal, St. Counsel for DDA with Ms. Razia and Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advs for R-3; Mr. Yoginder Handoo and Mr. Ashwin Kataria, Advocates for R-4

Title: YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.